Swopa loves that a Madison restaurant asked Governor Scott Walker to leave when customers booed him. He/she links to a Madison blogger who deleted the name of the restaurant after the restaurant received threats. (Threats? Were they reported to the police?) Swopa notes that he edited his post to delete the name of the restaurant, but he leaves in his "via Howie Klein on Twitter" link, and the name of the restaurant is right there.

Idiot. Don't rely on Firedoglake to protect you. They care. They want to protect you. But they just can't quite pull off the protectiveness they'd love to give you.

And that's the problem with liberals. They care. They're here to help. They're here to help the people they've decided are the people who deserve to be helped. But they do a half-assed job of protecting even the people they care about.

And how about believing in principles that you are willing to follow at a high level of abstraction? You love the idea of restaurants letting the passions of their customers determine who ought to be seated (at least when they sympathize with those passions). What sprang into my head was: Ollie's Barbecue!

Ollie's Barbecue is a family owned restaurant in Birmingham, Alabama, specializing in barbecued meats and homemade pies, with a seating capacity of 220 customers... The restaurant caters to a family and white-collar trade with a take-out service for Negroes....

And who thinks about tomorrow? The state capitol is occupied right now and plastered with thousands of signs this week, and isn't that just great? You haven't give a moment's thought — have you? — to what free speech rights will apply to the next group that wants to appropriate the state capitol? Are you planning on advocating viewpoint discrimination to keep the signs you find loathsome off the walls?

No. I know. You have no plan. You haven't thought about it. Swopa began his post this way:

Sometimes, it’s good to leave detached, cerebral meta-analyses of politics aside and just get a taste of public opinion being expressed the old-fashioned way.

Sometimes! The whole point of principles is that you're supposed to follow them all the time — especially when you would find it most satisfying to violate them. Swopa's all: Let's not be "detached" and "cerebral" today when we're having such fun.

What children!

IN THE COMMENTS: There's some evidence that the story of the booing and ejectment was a hoax. Of course, nothing in my post depends on whether the incident really happened or not. I'm writing about the reaction to the incident, not the incident itself. If it is a hoax, I would like to get to the bottom of it. Did the owners of the restaurant seek to endear themselves to Madisonians with viral P.R. about their political faith? Or were employees appropriating their employer's reputation?

Ollie's served the absolute best barbecue in town. The owner eventually came around. Ollie's is gone now unfortunately, though you can still buy the sauce. It was an institution that like a lot of city institutions used to not serve blacks. Why are we singling Ollie's out??? The waitresses were all black.

I remember a few years ago when a Denny's restaurant was sued because some blacks were refused service. How is this any different? Oh and before the liberals starting preaching their holier than thou mantra, this is the exact environment in Germany during the early Hitler days. This is total hypocrisy. The liberals love to paint the conservatives with the Nazi brush, but its them that are following the Nazi example.

Interesting, more lib shenannigans gone awry. First Maddow (failing), then that anti-troop assclown prank calling the governor (and failing), and now a lib restaurant lying about an incident and a lib blogger biting on it.

it is highly amusing that this Lefty boob tries to cover up the name of the restaurant, and then provides the Twitter link containing it--The Merchant rocks! RT @_RubberNeck_ Scott Walker asked to leave restaurant after excessive booing from other tables http://bit.ly/eUfwzpabout 15 hours ago via web Retweeted by 4 people

My four year old pulls stunts and throws tantrums when he doesn't get what he wants. So do these people. Just like a wise adult stays strong for the best interests of the child so must the political adults of America remain resolute in the face of the abuse and smears from the political children. Be the Honey Badger!

While it appears that Swopa got punked by his own side, still the story is totally believable.

If the last fews days have proven anything, it's that Madison is chock full'o rude liberal assholes. So when a blog written by rude liberal assholes gleefully reports that rude liberal assholes at a Madison restaurant behave like rude liberal assholes, then what's not to believe?

"And that's the problem with liberals. They care. They're here to help."

That line puts me in mind of something C.S. Lewis once said:

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences.”

Says it all. The child-like leftist mentality of zero " I want-it-all-and-I-want-it-now!" deferred gratification concept. The left has never met a gold egg-laying goose they didn't want to immediately kill for this evenings dinner. And anybody who wants to stop me is TOTALLY evil. And, oh, btw, we'll play by MY rules--except *I* don't have to abide by them--and when you nonetheless win even playing by *MY* rules I'll pick up my ball and go home...talking trash & shouting expletives as I go...PS....and if you get in my way you just might get hurt--got that buster!

Ah, but who remembers anything anymore? It's today that matters. The war dead are dead, and now their memorial is a handy place to tape your signs and back your table up against so all your stuff doesn't fall on the floor.

What goes wrong if you think memorials are just things put up by politicians for their own gain?

I claim, as in a few posts ago, they're misdefined, leading you away from what is good, towards cultism.

A progressive website posted a story about Governor Walker getting asked to leave a Madison, WI restaurant because he was getting booed by patrons. The blog post asked readers to call the restaurant and thank the owners. That blog post has been removed, and replaced by a post asking people not to call the restaurant. The blogger claims the restaurant is getting threatening phone calls, with no proof to back it up.

So, why was the original post removed? I mean, it would be big news if a sitting governor was denied service at a restaurant. If there’s one thing a blogger really likes, it’s heavy traffic and a big memeorandum thread. The problem is, Governor Walker denies ever stepping foot in the Merchant Restaurant, according to Badger Blogger. That blogger also called the restaurant, and the person he spoke to would neither confirm nor deny the allegation that Governor Walker got the boot. What’s interesting is what happened after the restaurant employee thought he disconnected the call.

But in fact, they didn’t hang up, it appears that they accidentally put the phone on speaker…. And BadgerBlogger tapes continued to roll.

Our audio captures the restaurant staff talking about how they have to take down the blog posting because people are starting to call about it, you can actually hear them logging into the blog and deleting it. Too late.

But in fact, they didn’t hang up, it appears that they accidentally put the phone on speaker…. And BadgerBlogger tapes continued to roll.

Our audio captures the restaurant staff talking about how they have to take down the blog posting because people are starting to call about it, you can actually hear them logging into the blog and deleting it. Too late.

What's the matter, Dud? You know, it's ok to take your dentures out of the glass they've been kept in all night and put them back in your mouth. You might just end up feeling more articulate as a result, despite your senility and other infirmities.

i'll admit that when i first read that story, i smiled. after a little reflection, refusing to serve potential customers based on their employment is pretty damn weak. like people everywhere else, the vast majority of TSA agents are just trying to do a decent job.

TSA agents don't create the stupid, useless rules that aggravate everybody, they just have to enforce them.

Here is some (admittedly grabbed almost randomly) text from the ruling:

"Section 201(a) of Title II commands that all persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods and services of any place of public accommodation without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin, and § 201(b) defines establishments as places of public accommodation if their operations affect commerce or segregation by them is supported by state action. Sections 201(b)(2) and (c) place any "restaurant . . . principally engaged in selling food for consumption on the premises" under the Act "if . . . it serves or offers to serve interstate travelers or a substantial portion of the food which it serves . . . has moved in commerce."

So, I get it that blacks eating at Ollie's should have been protected with this language, but how should the Wisconsin governor? Furthermore, why in the world - truly - would the governor not assert his rights? Well, I don't know what happened, maybe he did. But it just seems that if there were one person in the state who would not let someone get away with something like this, it would be a governor.

Restaurants generally have the right to exclude anyone they like, for whatever reason they like, as long as the person they would exclude is not a member of a protected class. Governors, are not a protected class under the law, so any restaurant could choose to deny a governor service.

Legally, they're okay.

Politically, and as an indication of their social smarts, though, it's a dumbass move. They're flagging themselves for the contempt of 50% of their potential customers, unless their customer base is all students or state workers who might approve.

That they took down the post suggests that they didn't really think things through, but acted on an emotional 'Boy! This'll show 'em!!' level. In other words, typical lefty bozos pretending to be grown up.

If the Badger Blogger guys would tell us how they confirmed with Gov. Walker, I'd be satisfied that it never happened. I have no reason to disbelieve the people at BB (looks like a good blog), but just saying they got confirmation isn't really helpful. I tried to register/login to ask them, but WordPress seems to hate me today.

And a man who dreamed of a time when people would be judged on the content of their character.

In the scenario of the post, the restaurant has judged that a man who as governor has pledged to strip public employees of most of their collective bargaining rights is unwelcome in their restaurant. There is no prejudging here: Scott Walker has taken a stand that repels some people, and he must accept the consequences.

In contrast, Ollie's Barbecue refused to seat Negroes completely based on the color of their skin. Saint or sinner, Ollie didn't care.

msmolly February 25th, 2011 at 8:09 pm7In response to Shoto @ 5Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker’s eyes have the glazed over look of a man who just jacked off to a Facebook album of your niece’s fifth birthday party.

In the scenario of the post, the restaurant has judged that a man who as governor has pledged to strip public employees of most of their collective bargaining rights is unwelcome in their restaurant. There is no prejudging here: Scott Walker has taken a stand that repels some people, and he must accept the consequences.

fls, you are a worthless piece of shit.

You just admitted it in print.

Gov. Walker was elected by the people of the State of Wisconsin, you lowlife piece of shit.

Reminds me of Ollie's Trolley a few blocks where I work. Owned by a black man, an Obama supporter, who proudly displays a picture of himself shaking hands with Obama. But, he also proudly displays pictures of himself with Bill Cunningham, the man who referred to Obama by his full name, Barack Hussein Obama and set the left into a conniption fit. Some people know how to disagree and still see the good character in others. If these lefties can do that, they're hiding it real well.

I'm not defending this, and it is outrageous, but can someone point me to a place where it lays out in black and white that you cannot discriminate based on political views? I'm having a hard time finding that. I'd just like to read about such a case. (Continuing to search - yes, I know how to use google.)

Restaurants generally have the right to exclude anyone they like, for whatever reason they like, as long as the person they would exclude is not a member of a protected class. Governors, are not a protected class under the law, so any restaurant could choose to deny a governor service. Legally, they're okay.

This is true. The people who are claiming this is some sort of civil rights violation are only showing their lack of knowledge regarding these sorts of laws.

Politically, and as an indication of their social smarts, though, it's a dumbass move. They're flagging themselves for the contempt of 50% of their potential customers, unless their customer base is all students or state workers who might approve.

This is probably also true. As a rule, a restaurant shouldn't be known for its politics. But it depends on the restaurant's target audience.

Restaurants generally have the right to exclude anyone they like, for whatever reason they like, as long as the person they would exclude is not a member of a protected class. Governors, are not a protected class under the law, so any restaurant could choose to deny a governor service. Legally, they're okay.

Interesting...if the guv was a black guy or a woman would it still be OK to exclude them? Or would it depend on the intent of the restaurant owner? Would it be OK to exclude Jesse Jackson as long as you didn't exclude all blacks?

They can't refuse to serve people because they don't like their political persuasion, religion or ethnicity.

Correct on the last two but not the first one. Political persuasion is not a protected class under Federal civil rights laws that cover private establishments. Unless Wisconsin has added that as a class, a restaurant owner can say that he doesn't people of a particular political viewpoint as customers. Probably not a good business move (and it can't be a pretext for keeping out people based on race, religion, etc.), but you can do that.

Sounds so Puritan...touch not the unclean thing and our movement will accept you.I suppose that we should also apply this to the "Handicapped Parking Spaces" at the door? Just tow them away if their bumper stickers are heretical. Who needs strangers among us!

Good point. I never understood why people who earn their living catering to the public would ever expose their views. No matter what your view is, someone will be offended, so why drive away a customer? Michael Jordan was one asked why he did not endorse democrats for office and his reply was that republicans also buy sneakers. In that one reply he encapsulated an MBA from Wharton.

Ritmo - ask yourself why these people want to maintain such purity in their associations. Never mind the legality of it - just ask yourself why would you ONLY want to surround yourself with like-minded people?

In California, for example, the Unruh Civil Rights Act, enacted in 1959, says that: "All persons within the jurisdiction of this state are free and equal, and no matter what their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry or national origin are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges or services in all business establishments of every kind whatsoever."

In Stoumen v. Reilly, a case interpreting the Unruh Act, the appellate court wrote: "Members of the public of lawful age have a right to patronize a public restaurant and a bar so long as they are acting properly and are not committing illegal and immoral acts. The proprietor has no right to exclude or reject a patron except for good cause, and if he does so without good cause, he is liable in damages."

We used to own a restaurant/deli and this is the law in California, probably in most states as well.

So as much as I would have loved to refuse service to assholes like FLS and others who I disagree with polically, I was not allowed to do so, UNLESS he was doing something inside my restaurant that was against the neutral rules that applied to everyone.

Just being on the other political side of the spectrum, does not count.

All my customers hating that person also doesn't give good cause or rise to the level of allowable refusing of service. Unless all the customers in the restaurant were going to riot and cause harm or damage, there is no reason to refuse service.

If I had those kinds of disruptive customers, I would kick them out as well, even if I agreed with them.

Doing some research, I see that restaurants are public accommodations, and if the patron is causing a disturbance (which may or may not be different that IS the cause of a disturbance) then the owner has the right to refuse. (As well as being a member of a protected class.) It appears that judges do not take kindly to *arbitrary* refusals.

I don't know if the owner whipped his patrons into a frenzy or not. If not, then it would appear that he would have a case for refusing service. In a better world, the patrons would have silently shunned if they disagreed with their governor, and simply let him eat his meal. So much more good can come of that.

Although, ya gotta love the 'update' on that FaceBook page that basically says, "Yeah, we booted him, and we can do that to anyone we want, and the people who disagree with our political discrimination are racists, so there!"

All that's missing is a picture of someone doing the "LALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU! LALALALALA!" thing.

...then it could be argued that he wasn't asked to leave due to his politics, but rather due to the disruption. And while that may or may not be legal (I'm not a lawyer, so don't ask me), it might be a smart way for the owner to maintain order in the restaurant. And complying with the request would be the smart and gracious thing for the Governor to do.

The Governor isn't fighting for the right to eat in that restaurant. He's fighting to get control of current and future budgets. Fighting over restaurant policies would only be a distraction from that. He has to choose his battles. "Stick it to them!" is the short-sighted, immature philosophy of the union supporters. Grown ups think more strategically than that.

And whether this is or is not a hoax, I suspect the staff thought it was clever and acted on their own initiative, and now the owner is kicking some asses and doing damage control.

Hmm. The first image that came into my mind when I read the Althouse headline was Lester Maddox chasing black customers away from his restaurant with an axe handle.

Liberalism has come full circle! Not only are they now the ones trying to "stand athwart history yelling 'Stop'," but now liberals in Madison occupy the niche once held by Lester Maddox down in Atlanta.

Not that a shaaaaarkkkkk would know the meaning of the word "reliance" or anything. After all, the species is known to sniff out a drop of blood from a mile away.

I compare one obscure film made of Bush with the persistent attempts and violent rhetoric aimed at Obama, Clinton and any successful Dem pol since Reagan. I can compare those things for a reason. There's not much of a comparison.

But it's good to know you've internalized the martyrdom and victimology complex that you so often criticize on the left. So that's good.

Some here are missing the point. Walker was not purportedly booted because of his political views. Per the Badger Blogger screenshot, Walker was asked to leave because "his presence was causing a disturbance." Based on the description of the circumstances, Walker was not the individual who was disturbing the peace at the Merchant.

Oh, AA will just say any contrarian, knee-jerk thing as long as it will win her the adulation of a bunch of uncritical "others". The sides don't matter so much, but seeing as how she's in Madison she has no choice but to pick on lefties for whatever reason is available and reap the love (and the jerking knees) of groupie-like retro-pubicons scattered throughout cyperspace in return.

Liberalism has come full circle! Not only are they now the ones trying to "stand athwart history yelling 'Stop'," but now liberals in Madison occupy the niche once held by Lester Maddox down in Atlanta.

Yes, because being a conservative in America today (particularly if you are the Governor of a state) is just like being a black person in the pre-civil rights era South. You have an interesting mix of self-pity, feelings of victimization and a need to be a drama queen, Big Mike. Maybe you should write a book about this and get a syndrome named after you.

No, actually, I was pointing out that there are dumbasses everywhere regardless of political affiliation. After 8 years of "Kill Bush", "Hang Bush", "Regime Change Now" and other shit, you left-wingers have created this environment. Good luck trying to put that genie back in the lamp after rubbing it for a decade.

Nice re-writing of history, Shark Bait. Care to cite all these calls for killing and hanging? I don't recall a lot of conservative outrage over them at the time. Although I do recall someone caught on Bill Clinton's White House lawn firing off a few rounds after the unhinged guys on the air couldn't help their hyperbole. Funny, that.

BTW, "Regime change" is not a call for assassination, but I guess you go to war with the army you've got. Today the dish sounds like "petty feigned indignation", served with a smattering of "My governor does so deserve respectful treatment no matter what he does. To do otherwise would be discriminatory and, uh, racist."

MadisonMan: Fen, did you somehow miss the evidence that this whole thing was most likely fabricated?

"And BadgerBlogger tapes continued to roll.

Our audio captures the restaurant staff talking about how they have to take down the blog posting because people are starting to call about it, you can actually hear them logging into the blog and deleting it."

My words are directed at the staff. Those involved should be fired. If the owner wants to employ types that will spit in your food because of your politics, he deserves to go out of business.

Ok Shaark, I get it. You're upset at some zombie-heads for making threats on someone who allegedly and recklessly engaged war crimes while declaring himself above the law. Despite whether any of these posters were making credible threats, they are inexcusable.

And yet, none of them culminated in so much as the shootings on the White House lawn during Clinton's administration. So the fact remains that the right was more fervent about their violence from an earlier point in time, and did more to act on it. Not surprising.

But you go ahead and take your fake outrage and false equivalence any way you can get it. I understand. I really do.

So C4, you say AA is an equal opportunity annoyer, eh. Then timing is everything 'cause all I've seen/read lately is Obama/liberals suck laced w/disingenuous sarcasm/hyperbole.

It was interesting watching her endless me, me, me interview re: her quickie marriage at the end when she says AA has the most intelligent posters in political blog stratosphere ie declarative statement knowing it's impossible to peruse the plethora of said political blogs in one's lifetime.

Now to be sure, AA does have a rather large following, but bigger isn't necessarily always better. fixednoise continually brags about it's 2.8 million prime time audience ...

but, but, but WWE RAW has (4) million lol

apples and oranges, eh

AA has developed her over-the-top niche, congrats! But like all other political blogs it's not gonna discover a cure for cancer any time soon, let alone solve a major political problem in America.

It's a nice place for many to vent, some angrily, some humorous, some sarcastic so it serves as a free speech vehicle and I will give her credit in that area as many blogs delete posts like there's no tomorrow.

There, I said something nice about AA as she is a strong believer in free speech and in a perfect world, everyone would agree on this concept.

Again, why AA's hissy fit re: defacing a few statues, whatever.

hmm, what was my original point and expected more ad hominems thrown my way after my last post, kinda disappointing ;)

Well, those of us who understand justice might have drawn a distinction between capturing someone and a need to kill him, anyway. I guess for your guys it's necessarily one and the same, though. Can't blame that on the left, can you?

February 7, 2001: While President George W. Bush was in the White House Residence, in Washington, DC, Robert Pickett, standing outside the perimeter fence, discharged a number of shots from a weapon towards the White House. The U.S. Park Police stated, according to CNN correspondent Eileen O'Connor, that the type of handgun that was confiscated was of a sophisticated type and had the shooter not been shooting from an obstructed angle view, the bullets would have reached the White House. Following a stand-off of about ten minutes, the incident ended when a Secret Service officer shot Pickett, resulting in an injury which required immediate hospital surgery. Pickett was found to have emotional problems and employment grievances. Pickett had previously written letters to the President about these grievances. A court in July 2001 sentenced Pickett to three years imprisonment in connection with the incident.

Althouse herself declared that she just likes being the bug in the punch bowl and can really only criticize the side that she surrounds herself with.

I mean, come on. She voted for Jesse Jackson!

The wingers here get on her for voting for Obama, but to her credit, she did claim that he seemed more reasonable than a computer-illiterate septuagenarian like McCain. And that would have been a much better reason than the fact that she went ga-ga starfuckers over his celebrity, a phenomenon which drove the right nuts and which I suspect was really more of her reason. She probably just wanted to get on board with a democratic bandwagon effect.

There's a fine coffee shop in Providence near the Brown University campus called Blue State Coffee. I got a good chuckle one day when they apologized for raising their prices. They put up a sign that started with the words:

I would, if only one of those sides wasn't much more in love with its guns.

Yeah, because one side hasn't been in love with blowing shit up, burning shit down, destroying property, and stuff.

keep in mind that I am a former member of AIM a long time ago in my wayward youth, where I learned all kinds of cool things to do from left-wingers that didn't require a gun, but were just as (if not more so) violent.

Again, how many "people's revolutionary this" and "something liberation front/army/group/etc" have we seen in America over the past several decades? Tons. Just like there have been huge amounts of right-wing extremist groups as well.

But again, why let facts get in the way. One side believes in the 2nd Amendment. THE HORROR!

C4: Creep someone else out, please. Your snarky stupid posts are like the chorus in a play written by high schoolers on ritlin and self love. You really are not smart. Or funny. Or perceptive. And like a poorly conceived and awfully written chorus you add nothing, absolutely nothing, to the play.

You have no integrity and apparently no ability to articulate a point of view beyond snark. You really do creep me out.

Yes. You slipped up when choosing a handle for your lastest sock puppet. I'm betting you lost a tooth and somehow got fecal matter up into the dead root. And the infection has spread to your brain.You're just wasting away now.

Fen, a good strong pimp like you should know that it always just comes down to image, right?

Or did you somehow have some actual arguments of your own that you, for the first time ever, wanted to try out?

Maybe I'm just stupid and didn't realize that your slander of someone with AIDS was a real strong and objective argument. Argument for what, exactly? I'm not sure. And I'm pretty sure you're not, either. But I bet in your mind that it seemed like a great argument, of some sort or another.

Michael, go be creeped out somewhere else. I don't give a damn about you, your shallow lack of any values, or your love of political prostitution.

Now, can you kindly go fuck yourself somewhere else? Hopefully the kind tone of that politely phrased request will protect you from the willies you feel long enough to find something productive and meaningful for you to do. Not that dressing up like Thurston Howell the Third and proclaiming yourself to be better than others isn't a productive and meaningful way for a douchebag like yourself to derive what little meaning out of life that you can manage to find.

C4: I am clearly not the first person to be creeped out by you. That much is apparent. You have no idea how I dress or what I do for a living or what I believe or what I support or anything about me. Nothing. You think shallow, dude, very shallow.

Not if he wants any more credibility than the guy who declared gay troops to be like orphans committing incest.

Oh wait. Same guy.

I think it's safe to assume that neither of you have any real arguments to contribute. It doesn't stop Ivana Trump wanna-be Michael from denouncing my snark, which is touching. But notice how he never has an argument of his own. At least I'm capable of spicing up my snark with an argument, from time to time.

What can you do, Michael?

Don't you have a cabaret act to perform, or something? Surely there's got to be a way a billionaire like yourself can do something interesting every now and then. Don't be such a stuffy sourpuss, just asking for Grey Poupon. That act went out the window with Louis Rukeyser. You've got to be more colorful these days.

And that would have been a much better reason than the fact that she went ga-ga starfuckers over his celebrity, a phenomenon which drove the right nuts and which I suspect was really more of her reason.

Too bad I missed that AA time frame lol but I'm sure it was the same everywhere in 2008 as I frequented Nate Silver's 538, RCP, Politico and HP. And at everyone there were die hard "truly intelligent" conservatives who were 100% convinced Barack Hussein Obama had no chance to be elected president. Many are still in therapy!

Interesting AA would go ga-ga over anything as she gives the impression of trying to be a celebrity her own self.

>

Yea, I'm sure AA wingers were devated when Obama was elected.

One of the catch phrases at 538 was: This is great news for John McCain! as conservatives were hoping/praying Obama would not be elected as the election drew near.

As mentioned previously, having grown up in the '60s never/ever thought an African/American would be elected president in my lifetime, so everything else is now icing on the cake.

I can die in peace! ;)

It will be interesting upon Obama's 2012 re-election what the reaction of Reps here and everywhere will be ~ oh the humanity!

Also mentioned previously I voted for McGovern in '72 for the few concerned about my age. Hint: the voting age was lowered to 18 in 1971. So yes Virginia, they changed the voting to (18) just for me and was one of the few lol who voted for McGovern.

But on the bright side, I didn't vote for the only president in American history who resigned in disgrace!

and so it goes ...

btw, that liberal bastion of society HP was the first to break the Obama "bittergate" story as it was news, unlike fixednoise who doesn't say anything bad re: Reps/Cons/teabaggers, etc.

I just don't have a problem exposing when emperors have no clothes. Being aware of all shortcomings (including one's own) and self-deprecating and critical are crucial to a stable society. So that's why I have no problem making fun of rich bastards who feel they're better than everyone else while pining away for the myth of the noble truth. I think even some other Althouse commenters get this.

But I really do have to get on with enjoying the rest of the day. To be fair to Michael (not that he needs it), his political leanings probably aren't that far off the deep end. He's just sheltered and shallow and probably believes in nurturing falsities like the "political (i.e. apathetic and boring) middle", for reasons that serve his own self-interest and no one else's. He probably can't help it.

But I can. And not only will I poke that for the sake of humor and a more examined moral direction, I'll do it for the hell of it.

C4: You have put me in an incredibly good mood. I am going out for my long weekend run and then I shall take my beautiful wife and my strapping young son out for a nice dinner somewhere to celebrate our good fortune in life. I would suggest you do the same. We are enjoying splendid weather today and earlier I got a nice note from a kid I am putting through school down El Salvador way. A real gentleman that kid.So, thanks for the laughs and reminding me that I am blessed.

Bill and Ted were "excellent" to one another. But we conservatives must be reminded of our nobility! Noble treatment of other important people like ourselves and acknowledgment of our own dignified presence is what we should value above everything else!

btw, there's never any issues to discuss, just AA lemmings sayin' in total agreement 24/7 to everything she posts.

You're full of shit and a psychopath. Nobody here agrees with AA 24/7, but you can't be bothered to actually pay attention. Lots of people here don't like that she voted for Obama, supports gay rights, is squishy on economics in general. I'd say most of us here are more to the right of AA by a lot. But you go ahead fantasizing about AA water-carriers.

This all looks suspicious. At the Facebook page under discussions, there is only one discussion, Walker OUT. No explanation or anything.

All info on this seems to come from one blogger, Naomi House. Even the reported threats to the restaurant originate from Houser in the comments at Fire Dog Lake. I can't find any other source for any of Houser's claims.

"I claim, as in a few posts ago, they're misdefined, leading you away from what is good, towards cultism."

Excellent point. We have to be aware of the manipulation of our feelings by politicians when they invoke the war dead. I know from experience how comforting it is to remember personal heros (relatives) with pride and tenderness, all mixed in with love of country, song, memorials, etc. So easy to take advantage of.

Pogo: it's worth reposting a Ritmo comment from one earlier last week, displaying what he's up to at Althouse, and why he comments here:

Ritmo Brasileiro said: It's good to know that the stupidest threads are just ripe for the threadjacking. I'll be sure to leave a trail of turds on every one of the brain droppings here that suit my fancy. Getting you shit-eaters to complain about the taste after opening your mouths wide and saying "Ahhhh..." to every bad idea under the sun is very satisfying, I must admit.- 10/16/10 10:28 AM

Shiloh, Alex is a bit like Ritmo but from a different direction. He doesn't have positions, just is playing a game.

I think there's more depth with you, but for some reason you're trying to make yourself feel better by denigrating the people around here. I suspect, just from your tone, you actually do have positions and care.

If you ignore the various jesters, playing for fool for their own amusement, you'll find there's nothing really lemmingy about it here. Though, on some topics there's a lot more agreement than others.

My restaurant review via Google will be along the lines of: waiter snarked about my haircut and suit. Called my companions "corporate whores" and "RepubliThugs". Evidence that he may have spit in our food.

Having surfed political blogs since 2001 there isn't much new under the sun. Again, Reps and Dems yellin' at each other ad nauseam to no effect.

The really, really angry posters can be somewhat amusing if taken in moderation.

Ironically joined a reality tv site in 2001 'cause I was a fan of Big Brother and discovered they had a current affairs forum where some of the posters really hated/despised each other lol and thought, hmm, I should fit right in.

There were threads about abortion, evolution, bush's iraq fiasco that went well over (1) thousand posts ~ fun times! :)

>

Most regulars at political blogs, including myself, end up repeating themselves over and over and over again hence, ergo, therefore ~ rinse, lather, repeat.

There was a conservative buddy of mine, I know shocking I had a Rep buddy, who used to keep all her talkin' points in a separate folder so she would always be ready for battle! ie any eventuality.